LONG LIVE MEN?
By Al Knight Denver Post Columnist www.denverpost.com/opinion/knight0228.htm
Feb. 28, 2001 - It took a while but at last the issue of men's health has
elbowed its way onto the political stage. Earlier this month, a bill was
introduced in Congress to establish an Office of Men's Health, an agency that
would serve the same function as the Office of Women's Health, established 10
years ago. As it turns out, men's health hasn't compared well for some time. As
recently as 1900 the life expectancy of men and women was about the same. Even
as late as 1920 the gap was just one year but then things got dramatically
worse. The life expectancy gap by 1998 had increased to around six years. Black
males have it even worse than their white counterparts. Black women, on average,
outlive black men by about seven years. Nor is that the worst of the bad news.
Men don't fare as well as women when it comes to any of the top 10 causes of
death. They are nearly twice as likely as women to die of heart disease. Men die
from cancer at a rate nearly 50 percent greater than women. They are three times
as likely to die of injuries or four times as likely to die of suicide or AIDS.
They drown at higher rates, die at higher rates from violent crimes and when it
comes to onthe-job fatalities they practically have the field to themselves.
Prostate cancer, a uniquely male problem, makes up 37 percent of all cancer
cases yet receives only 5 percent of research funding. For example, the National
Cancer Insti AL KNIGHT tute spent $424 million on breast cancer last year but
just $190 million on prostate cancer. Expenditures at the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention were even more lopsided. Last year breast and cervical
cancer received $185 million in outreach and screening programs, compared to
prostate cancer (no screening) at a mere $11 million. So what's the reason for
this disparity. Partly it is because women have done a good job speaking up for
themselves, but mostly it is that men have done a poor job. The tough guy image
endures. Boys don't cry and men don't go to the doctor. There are various
national studies that have shown men are 25 percent less likely than women to
visit a doctor and are much less likely to have regular checkups. A significant
portion of the male population continues to mispronounce prostate cancer,
frequently calling it prostrate cancer. It will not be enough if men simply
improve their English proficiency. They will need to change some habits if the
record is to improve. There apparently is almost no health comparison that
doesn't ar gue in favor of more attention for men. There was even a 1999 study
at the Colorado State University on back pain. The researchers examined men and
women who work on small or family farms and found out that once again it was the
guy who suffered most. It is hard to predict what Congress will do with this
issue, especially since Republicans who control Congress typically resist
creating new government programs. Interestingly, there are about 50 sponsors in
the House of Representatives and a few of them are women. The main sponsor, Rep.
Randy Cunningham, R-Calif., himself a survivor of prostate cancer, seems to have
discovered a theme that just might work this year. He has, in two ways, tied the
future of the bill to the involvement of - had you guessed it? - women. The
first is to emphasize that women most often do the heavy lifting of making sure
the fathers and husbands get needed medical attention. It's also women,
Cunningham says, who have something to gain by closing the life expectancy gap
so they won't be in "the unenviable position of seeing their husbands,
fathers, and even their sons suffer and die prematurely." Clever move. If
women are for the bill, who would have the nerve to be against it?